Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening program: The Sogn and Fjordane study

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 51, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 962-968

  Juel, Inger Marie ^a   Skaane, Per ^b   Hoff, Solveig Roth ^c   Johannessen, Gunnar ^a   Hofvind, Solveig ^d  

^a Section for Rheumatology   (Norway)

^b ULLEVÅL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^c Aalesund Central Hospital   (Norway)

^d Cancer Registry of Norway   (Norway)

Author keywords

Breast; Digital radiography; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

AVERAGE GLANDULAR DOSE; BREAST; BREAST CANCER SCREENING; CANCER DETECTION; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DOUBLE READING; EXPERT PANELS; FULL FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; MAMMOGRAPHY SCREENING; PERFORMANCE INDICATORS; PHOTON COUNTING; POSITIVE PREDICTIVE VALUES; RADIATION DOSE; RATING SCALE; RECALL RATE; SCREEN FILMS; SCREEN-FILM MAMMOGRAPHIES; SCREENING PROGRAMS; SOCIAL SCIENCE DATA;

BENCHMARKING; BIOMINERALIZATION; DETECTORS; DOSIMETRY; PHOTONS; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIOLOGY; RADIOTHERAPY; X RAY SCREENS;

MAMMOGRAPHY;

AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; NORWAY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIATION DOSAGE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 77958025818     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/02841851.2010.504969     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Vainio H, Bianchini F, editors. IARC handbook of cancer prevention. Volume 7. Breast cancer screening. Lyon: IARC Press; 2002 (http://www.iarc.fr).
2. The Swedish organized service screening evaluation group. Reduction in breast cancer mortality from the organised service screening with mammography: 2. Validation with alternative analytic methods. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:52-56
3. Gabe R, Duffy SW. Evaluation of service screening mammography in practice: the impact on breast cancer mortality. Ann Oncol 2005;16:153-162
4. Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D'Orsi CJ, Isaacs PK, Moss LJ, Karellas A, et al. Comparison of full-fi eld digital mammography with screen-fi lm mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 2001;218:873-880
5. Lewin JM, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, Moss LJ, Isaacs PK, Karellas A, et al. Clinical comparison of full-fi eld digital mammography and screen-fi lm mammography for detection of breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 2002;179: 671-677
6. Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-fi lm and fullfi eld digital mammography with soft-copy reading - Oslo I study. Radiology 2003;229:877-884
7. Skaane P, Skjennald A. Screen-fi lm mammography versus full-fi eld digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program - the Oslo II Study. Radiology 2004;232:197-204.
8. Skaane P, Skjennald A, Young K, Egge E, Jebsen I, Sager EM, et al. Follow-up and fi nal results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-fi lm mammography and fullfi eld digital mammography with soft-copy reading. Acta Radiol 2005;46:679-689
9. Skaane P, Hofvind S, Skjennald A. Randomized trial of screen-fi lm versus full-fi eld digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and fi nal results of the Oslo-II study. Radiology 2007;244:708-717
10. Pisano ED, Gatsonis CA, Yaffe MJ, Hendrick RE, Tosteson ANA, Fryback DG, et al. American College Of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology. Radiology 2005;236:404-412
11. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus fi lm mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005;353:1773-1783
12. Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Cormack JB, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus fi lm mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 2008;246: 376-383
13. Pisano ED, Acharyya S, Cole EB, Marques HS, Yaffe MJ, Blevins M, et al. Cancer cases from ACRIN digital mammographic imaging screening trial: radiologist analysis with use of a logistic regression model. Radiology 2009; 252:348-357
14. Heddson B, Rönnow K, Olsson M, Miller D. Digital versus screen-fi lm mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program. Eur J Radiol 2007;64:419-425
15. Vigeland E, Klaasen H, Klingen TA, Hofvind S, Skaane P. Full-fi eld digital mammography compared to screen fi lm mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study. Eur Radiol 2008;18:183-191
16. Del Turco MR, Mantellini P, Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Martinelli F, Lazzari B, et al. Full-fi eld digital versus screenfi lm mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts. Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:860-866
17. Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira SM, McCormack VA, Shiel S, Perry N, dos Santos Silva IM. Full-fi eld digital versus screen-fi lm mammography: comparison within the UK breast screening program and systematic review of published data. Radiology 2009;251:347-358
18. Sala M, Comas M, Maci à F, Martinez J, Casamitjana M, Castells X. Implementation of digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program: effect of screening round on recall rate and cancer detection. Radiology 2009;252:31-39
19. Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijrinck D, Deurenberg J, Beekman M, Visser R, et al. Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 2009;253: 353-358
20. Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O'Doherty A, Flanagan FL. Comparison of digital mammography and screen-fi lm mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1010-1018
21. Åslund M, Cederström B, Lundqvist M, Danielsson M. Scatter rejection in multislit digital mammography. Med Phys 2006;33:933-940
22. Hofvind S, Geller B, Vacek PM, Thoresen S, Skaane P. Using the European guidelines to evaluate the Norwegian breast cancer screening program. Eur J Epidemiol 2007;22:447-455
23. Dance DR, Thilander-Klang A, Sandborg M, Skinner CL, Castellano Smith IA, Alm Carlsson G. Infl uence of anode/ fi lter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study. Br J Radiol 2000;73:1056-1067
24. D' O rsi C, Bassett L, Berg W, Feig SA, Jackson VP, Kopans DB, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS-Mammography. Fourth edition. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
25. Skaane P. Studies comparing screen-fi lm mammography and full-fi eld digital mammography in breast cancer screening: updated review. Acta Radiol 2009;50:3-14.
26. Fisher U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R, et al. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifi cations: full-fi eld digital mammography vs screen-fi lm mammography. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2679-2683
27. Hermann KP, Obenauer S, Funke M, Grabbe EH. Magnifi cation mammography: a comparison of full-fi eld digital mammography and screen-fi lm mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifi cations. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2188-2191
28. Skaane P, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Piguet JC, Young K, et al. Breast lesion detection and classifi cation: comparison of screen-fi lm mammography and full-fi eld digital mammography with soft-copy readingobserver performance study. Radiology 2005;237:37-44.
29. Yang WT, Lai CJ, Whitman GJ, Murphy WA Jr, Dryden MJ, Kushwaha AC, et al. Comparison of full-fi eld digital mammography and screen-fi lm mammography for detection and characterization of simulated small masses. Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:576-581
30. Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Munzel U, Baum F, Grabbe E. Screen fi lm vs full-fi eld digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1697-1702
31. Bick U, Diekmann F. Digital mammography: what do we and what don ' t we know? Eur Radiol 2007;17:1931-1942
32. Sankararaman S, Karellas A, Vendantham S, Sechopoulos I, D 'Orsi CJ. Detection of simulated microcalcifi cations in a phantom with digital mammography: effect on pixel size. Radiology 2007;244:130-137
33. Yaffe MJ, Mainprize JG, Jong RA. Technical developments in mammography. Health Phys 2008;95:599-611.
34. Williams MB, Raghunathan P, More MJ, Seibert JA, Kwan A, Lo JY, et al. Optimization of exposure parameters in full fi eld digital mammography. Med Phys 2008;35:2414-2423